LONGECITY

http://www.cbsnews.c...in6422159.shtml

it's being broadcast right now on TV, and the video will be available within 30-60 mins.
Edited by prophets, 25 April 2010 - 11:25 PM.

http://www.cbsnews.c...in6422159.shtml

Ah, the requisite pre-finals drug warning.
I liked ad for the Alzheimer's foundation at the beginning.

i must be an idiot, because 50%+ of college kids being on adderall seems way more than i would have thought.

50% seems a little high to me and I recently went to a college where I'd imagine it would have above average use. I'd bet the vast majority of that 50% have only done it once or twice.

50% seems a little high to me and I recently went to a college where I'd imagine it would have above average use. I'd bet the vast majority of that 50% have only done it once or twice.

Yes indeed, that's SOP for reporting about drugs. News is entertainment, first and foremost.
Edited by chrono, 26 April 2010 - 10:45 AM.

So is the program heavily negative?

So is the program heavily negative?

no

So is the program heavily negative?

The only negative thing mentioned in the entire thing was that the long-term effects on congitive function are not known.(and mentioned the blood pressure/heart effects for a second)

Otherwise quite positive and interesting to know that the Harvard professor takes pills haha!

I really want to try adderal it sounds like ritalin (sounds good as), but i keep hearing how its similar to modafinil which isn't that good at all:p
Edited by Rain, 26 April 2010 - 02:04 PM.

Surprisingly positive stuff. I commented on the episode on my blog: 60 minutes on boosting brain power.

So is the program heavily negative?

The only negative thing mentioned in the entire thing was that the long-term effects on congitive function are not known.(and mentioned the blood pressure/heart effects for a second)

Otherwise quite positive and interesting to know that the Harvard professor takes pills haha!

I really want to try adderal it sounds like ritalin (sounds good as), but i keep hearing how its similar to modafinil which isn't that good at all:p

I like modafinil - makes me vigilant. Too expensive though and I hate waiting 10 days to get them.

Can anyone comment on this, seems to be a large discrepancy? I can't access it:

Rates of non‐prescribed s-mulant use:
‐4.1% college students report last year use(2)
• Among college students ‐whites, members of fraternites and sororites, individuals with LOWER grade point averages, use of immediate‐release prepara-ons, and individuals who report ADHD symptoms at highest risk for misusing and diverging stimulants

McCabe SE. Knight JR. Teter CJ. Wechsler H. Non‐medical use of prescrip-on s-mulants among US college students: prevalence and correlates from a natonal survey Addicton. 2005; 100(1): 96‐106

seems that all of the mainstream media stories on cognitive enhancers just focus on prescription meds. not sure if it makes the story more sensational or what. never hear about the racetams or any of the others in these stories.

i have spoken personally with a couple of the big networks and invariably the discussions turn to prescription meds- they don't seem particularly interested in some of the alternatives that are arguably much more effective and have little if any addictive qualities.
Edited by synapse, 11 May 2010 - 11:57 AM.

seems that all of the mainstream media stories on cognitive enhancers just focus on prescription meds. not sure if it makes the story more sensational or what. never hear about the racetams or any of the others in these stories.

i have spoken personally with a couple of the big networks and invariably the discussions turn to prescription meds- they don't seem particularly interested in some of the alternatives that are arguably much more effective and have little if any addictive qualities.

Much more effective? That's a big claim don't you think. Most college-students use Adderall and Ritalin to increase their GPA and their ability to learn new material. Not everybody responds to racetams and other vitamins, so I would like to hear some backing on this huge claim.

Regards

seems that all of the mainstream media stories on cognitive enhancers just focus on prescription meds. not sure if it makes the story more sensational or what. never hear about the racetams or any of the others in these stories.

i have spoken personally with a couple of the big networks and invariably the discussions turn to prescription meds- they don't seem particularly interested in some of the alternatives that are arguably much more effective and have little if any addictive qualities.

Much more effective? That's a big claim don't you think. Most college-students use Adderall and Ritalin to increase their GPA and their ability to learn new material. Not everybody responds to racetams and other vitamins, so I would like to hear some backing on this huge claim.

Regards

It is a big claim, and this is probably milking his definiton of 'alternatives' but I think you could indeed very easily make a good argument for:

A really good diet,
Regular exercise,
Quality sleep,
Food supplements: Blueberries, Green Tea, etc,
Supplements: Fishoil, Magnesium, Vitamin D, etc,
Nootropics: Piracetam, Choline, ALCAR, Lithium, etc,
.................................................................................... (is greater than) > Adderall and/or Ritalin

Now admittedly I fudged the issue a little, but let's face it the vast majority of students don't do more than 1 or 2 things off that list-if any-so I think the point is valid.

seems that all of the mainstream media stories on cognitive enhancers just focus on prescription meds. not sure if it makes the story more sensational or what. never hear about the racetams or any of the others in these stories.

i have spoken personally with a couple of the big networks and invariably the discussions turn to prescription meds- they don't seem particularly interested in some of the alternatives that are arguably much more effective and have little if any addictive qualities.

Much more effective? That's a big claim don't you think. Most college-students use Adderall and Ritalin to increase their GPA and their ability to learn new material. Not everybody responds to racetams and other vitamins, so I would like to hear some backing on this huge claim.

Regards

It is a big claim, and this is probably milking his definiton of 'alternatives' but I think you could indeed very easily make a good argument for:

A really good diet,
Regular exercise,
Quality sleep,
Food supplements: Blueberries, Green Tea, etc,
Supplements: Fishoil, Magnesium, Vitamin D, etc,
Nootropics: Piracetam, Choline, ALCAR, Lithium, etc,
.................................................................................... (is greater than) > Adderall and/or Ritalin

Now admittedly I fudged the issue a little, but let's face it the vast majority of students don't do more than 1 or 2 things off that list-if any-so I think the point is valid.

I think there is sufficient evidence on the ImmInst forums alone! icantgoforthat's 'alternative' regimen is far superior than taking an amphetamine based drug. Cognitive enhancement (esp long-term) is much more than simply taking amphetamines. In fact, amphetamines alone will likely only create obstacles to cognitive enhancement over the long run.
Edited by synapse, 11 May 2010 - 03:32 PM.

seems that all of the mainstream media stories on cognitive enhancers just focus on prescription meds. not sure if it makes the story more sensational or what. never hear about the racetams or any of the others in these stories.

i have spoken personally with a couple of the big networks and invariably the discussions turn to prescription meds- they don't seem particularly interested in some of the alternatives that are arguably much more effective and have little if any addictive qualities.

Much more effective? That's a big claim don't you think. Most college-students use Adderall and Ritalin to increase their GPA and their ability to learn new material. Not everybody responds to racetams and other vitamins, so I would like to hear some backing on this huge claim.

Regards

It is a big claim, and this is probably milking his definiton of 'alternatives' but I think you could indeed very easily make a good argument for:

A really good diet,
Regular exercise,
Quality sleep,
Food supplements: Blueberries, Green Tea, etc,
Supplements: Fishoil, Magnesium, Vitamin D, etc,
Nootropics: Piracetam, Choline, ALCAR, Lithium, etc,
.................................................................................... (is greater than) > Adderall and/or Ritalin

Now admittedly I fudged the issue a little, but let's face it the vast majority of students don't do more than 1 or 2 things off that list-if any-so I think the point is valid.

I think there is sufficient evidence on the ImmInst forums alone! icantgoforthat's 'alternative' regimen is far superior than taking an amphetamine based drug. Cognitive enhancement (esp long-term) is much more than simply taking amphetamines. In fact, amphetamines alone will likely only create obstacles to cognitive enhancement over the long run.

I think that students look for quick-fixes, incl. myself, and I believe that amphetamines and related ADHD drugs would help more than i.e. taking Piracetam and ALCAR for instance. That's the scientific consensus anyway. I don't know any studies showing any racetams to have a profound effect on healthy individuals working memory, focus etc, whereas evidence as such is available for both Ritalin and Adderall. I don't know about long-term though. How do you know that the racetams don't have a detrimental effect on individuals long-term? Exercise, great diet and so on are the real nootropics for now and of course general vitamins.

seems that all of the mainstream media stories on cognitive enhancers just focus on prescription meds. not sure if it makes the story more sensational or what. never hear about the racetams or any of the others in these stories.

i have spoken personally with a couple of the big networks and invariably the discussions turn to prescription meds- they don't seem particularly interested in some of the alternatives that are arguably much more effective and have little if any addictive qualities.

Much more effective? That's a big claim don't you think. Most college-students use Adderall and Ritalin to increase their GPA and their ability to learn new material. Not everybody responds to racetams and other vitamins, so I would like to hear some backing on this huge claim.

Regards

It is a big claim, and this is probably milking his definiton of 'alternatives' but I think you could indeed very easily make a good argument for:

A really good diet,
Regular exercise,
Quality sleep,
Food supplements: Blueberries, Green Tea, etc,
Supplements: Fishoil, Magnesium, Vitamin D, etc,
Nootropics: Piracetam, Choline, ALCAR, Lithium, etc,
.................................................................................... (is greater than) > Adderall and/or Ritalin

Now admittedly I fudged the issue a little, but let's face it the vast majority of students don't do more than 1 or 2 things off that list-if any-so I think the point is valid.

First off MPH/DexMPH are not amphetamines.

Can you show me studies that prove taking the above vitamins/supplements > stimulants?
I do not believe they exist, and I am calling your bluff.

He's making the argument that the combination of those elements listed are superior to adderall or ritalin alone.
Edited by czukles, 11 May 2010 - 08:43 PM.

He's making the argument that the combination of those elements listed are superior to adderall or ritalin alone.

I took all those things and was a professional athlete and did not experience any near the same amount of benefit as stimulants.

If he is going to say that the above regimen is superior, then he should prove it.

Stimulants have many shortcomings. They are addictive and users can become dependent. Tolerance occurs and decreases the potential benefits. The long-term effects of some these drugs on cognitive function is not known. This is a big risk to take.

Perhaps the better argument to make is that a healthy lifestyle coupled with a good supplement regimen enhances/preserves cognitive function without the consequences of long-term stimulant use.

Stimulants have many shortcomings. They are addictive and users can become dependent. Tolerance occurs and decreases the potential benefits. The long-term effects of some these drugs on cognitive function is not known. This is a big risk to take.

Perhaps the better argument to make is that a healthy lifestyle coupled with a good supplement regimen enhances/preserves cognitive function without the consequences of long-term stimulant use.

I would like to echo czukles point here. To me, there is a fundamental difference between long-term brain health and a short-term stimulant rush.

I would also argue that neither adderall nor ritalin would be considered "nootropics" in the traditional sense.

See the wikipedia entry on nootropics for a general intro. The word was first coined by Corneliu E. Giurgea in 1972. He stated that nootropic drugs should have the following characteristics:

1.They should enhance learning and memory.
2.They should enhance the resistance of learned behaviors/memories to conditions which tend to disrupt them (e.g. electroconvulsive shock, hypoxia).
3.They should protect the brain against various physical or chemical injuries (e.g. barbiturates, scopalamine).
4.They should increase the efficacy of the tonic cortical/subcortical control mechanisms.
5.They should lack the usual pharmacology of other psychotropic drugs (e.g. sedation, motor stimulation) and possess very few side effects and extremely low toxicity.

Source: Giurgea C (1972). "[Pharmacology of integrative activity of the brain. Attempt at nootropic concept in psychopharmacology] ("Vers une pharmacologie de l'active integrative du cerveau: Tentative du concept nootrope en psychopharmacologie")" (in French). Actual Pharmacol (Paris) 25: 115–56. PMID 4541214.
Edited by synapse, 11 May 2010 - 09:47 PM.

I would also argue that neither adderall nor ritalin would be considered "nootropics" in the traditional sense.

See the wikipedia entry on nootropics for a general intro. The word was first coined by Corneliu E. Giurgea in 1972. He stated that nootropic drugs should have the following characteristics:

1.They should enhance learning and memory.
2.They should enhance the resistance of learned behaviors/memories to conditions which tend to disrupt them (e.g. electroconvulsive shock, hypoxia).
3.They should protect the brain against various physical or chemical injuries (e.g. barbiturates, scopalamine).
4.They should increase the efficacy of the tonic cortical/subcortical control mechanisms.
5.They should lack the usual pharmacology of other psychotropic drugs (e.g. sedation, motor stimulation) and possess very few side effects and extremely low toxicity.

Source: Giurgea C (1972). "[Pharmacology of integrative activity of the brain. Attempt at nootropic concept in psychopharmacology] ("Vers une pharmacologie de l'active integrative du cerveau: Tentative du concept nootrope en psychopharmacologie")" (in French). Actual Pharmacol (Paris) 25: 115–56. PMID 4541214.

Yeah, nice current article.

I think my previous post addresses most of the issues you bring up (with references).

http://www.imminst.o...mp;#entry397890

Also, the long-term effects of 'nootropics' are less known than the long term effects of stimulants. MPH has been around since the 50's and Dexedrine even longer.

Stimulants are not necessarily the answer for everyone, but you are making statements that are not backed up by evidence.

Also

psychiatrist's knowledge > your knowledge

It is a big claim, and this is probably milking his definiton of 'alternatives' but I think you could indeed very easily make a good argument for:

A really good diet,
Regular exercise,
Quality sleep,
Food supplements: Blueberries, Green Tea, etc,
Supplements: Fishoil, Magnesium, Vitamin D, etc,
Nootropics: Piracetam, Choline, ALCAR, Lithium, etc,
.................................................................................... (is greater than) > Adderall and/or Ritalin

Now admittedly I fudged the issue a little, but let's face it the vast majority of students don't do more than 1 or 2 things off that list-if any-so I think the point is valid.

First off MPH/DexMPH are not amphetamines.

Can you show me studies that prove taking the above vitamins/supplements > stimulants?
I do not believe they exist, and I am calling your bluff.

Firstly, if you reread my original wording (actually ill retype it) I said 'make a good argument for'. Secondly, of course no hard evidence exists to support that position, but its not within the realm of possibility a study could ever be performed that would. Thirdly, I can totally respect your position re 'statements that are not backed up by evidence' and often argue that view myself. But these are the drawbacks from being on the cutting-edge of science, if you need an RCT to prove its a good idea to look left and right before you cross the road, then good luck to you!

It is a big claim, and this is probably milking his definiton of 'alternatives' but I think you could indeed very easily make a good argument for:

A really good diet,
Regular exercise,
Quality sleep,
Food supplements: Blueberries, Green Tea, etc,
Supplements: Fishoil, Magnesium, Vitamin D, etc,
Nootropics: Piracetam, Choline, ALCAR, Lithium, etc,
.................................................................................... (is greater than) > Adderall and/or Ritalin

Now admittedly I fudged the issue a little, but let's face it the vast majority of students don't do more than 1 or 2 things off that list-if any-so I think the point is valid.

First off MPH/DexMPH are not amphetamines.

Can you show me studies that prove taking the above vitamins/supplements > stimulants?
I do not believe they exist, and I am calling your bluff.

Firstly, if you reread my original wording (actually ill retype it) I said 'make a good argument for'. Secondly, of course no hard evidence exists to support that position, but its not within the realm of possibility a study could ever be performed that would. Thirdly, I can totally respect your position re 'statements that are not backed up by evidence' and often argue that view myself. But these are the drawbacks from being on the cutting-edge of science, if you need an RCT to prove its a good idea to look left and right before you cross the road, then good luck to you!

understood..

I am not advocating stimulants for anyone, just saying that there exists some hyperbole about the actual risks.
A good diet, exercise, meditation, challenging mental stimulation and some proven supplements can help ADD symptoms and overall mental abilities. But , I know from experience (for me at least, and it appears for most people) that none of those things provide the immediate and significant improvements in concentration resulting from the ADD meds.

I think the value of the ability to sit down for 11 hours and remain focused on a problem or project is underrated. Especially with all the distractions that exist these days.